Help
I think it was vulnerable none
South opens with 1♠, and it goes Pass, Pass and now to you with
♠AKJ
♥AQxx
♦Qxxxx
♣x
I went with double as partner is OK with Equal Level Conversion to the diamonds if need be and partner bids quite well so far. Do you agree?
Page 1 of 1
Balancing seat double? Step 1 of bidding problem
#2
- Group: Full Members
- Posts: 475
- Joined: 2008-March-07
- Gender:Male
- Location:Oulu, Finland
- Interests:How to find out shape below 2NT.
Posted 2010-August-16, 06:03
Yes to double but over partners 2C I'm going to bid 2NT.
#3
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 2,555
- Joined: 2007-January-22
Posted 2010-August-16, 07:23
Quote
Do you agree?
And what exactly was the alternative action ?
Easy double especially if 2♦ then doesn't show very strong hand.
#4
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 2,987
- Joined: 2009-February-15
Posted 2010-August-16, 13:22
1NT is a serious alternative imo.
and the result can be plotted on a graph.
#5
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 12,029
- Joined: 2009-February-21
- Gender:Male
- Location:St. George, UT
Posted 2010-August-16, 13:31
Flameous, on Aug 16 2010, 06:03 AM, said:
Yes to double but over partners 2C I'm going to bid 2NT.
this is close for me. 16, then adding a king for being in bal seat. But, then I would probably subtract a bit for the negatives about the hand, and just ELC after double.
"Bidding Spades to show spades can work well." (Kenberg)
#6
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 2,555
- Joined: 2007-January-22
Posted 2010-August-16, 13:36
Quote
1NT is a serious alternative imo.
I am used to playing 1NT is ~11-14 in reopening seat so I didn't consider it.
Do you prefer other style or do you bid 1NT regardless ?
#7
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 1,640
- Joined: 2009-February-16
Posted 2010-August-16, 14:13
If 15 is in your range for 1NT then I would bid that. We can always jump to game later when partner bids stayman 
"Are you saying that LTC merits a more respectful dismissal?"
#8
- 2011 Poster of The Year winner
-
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 6,002
- Joined: 2010-July-08
- Gender:Male
Posted 2010-August-16, 14:44
I would bid 1N. I would view playing a range of 11-14 over 1S p p for 1N as flat out unplayable. I prefer 12-16 over spades but w/e.
blogging at http://www.justinlall.com
#9
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 10,093
- Joined: 2008-December-11
- Gender:Male
- Location:North Texas, USA
- Interests:Mountain Biking
Posted 2010-August-16, 14:44
11 to 16 is my range over 1M - p - p and that is my call. Not perfect but x and 2D hardly is either since I do not play ELC.
Hi y'all!
Winner - BBO Challenge bracket #6 - February, 2017.
Winner - BBO Challenge bracket #6 - February, 2017.
#10
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 2,555
- Joined: 2007-January-22
Posted 2010-August-16, 14:54
Quote
I would bid 1N. I would view playing a range of 11-14 over 1S p p for 1N as flat out unplayable. I prefer 12-16 over spades but w/e.
I am just asking, no strong opinion.
At least 2 elite parterships play 11-14 there and it's default in Poland so I would be surprised if it's unplayable but wouldn't be surprised at all if it's inferior.
This is rare sequence anyway so w/e.
#11
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 2,211
- Joined: 2006-April-22
Posted 2010-August-16, 22:44
Think the split X vs 1N should revolve on the other major.
X invites the other major; 1N not.
X invites the other major; 1N not.
#12
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 6,373
- Joined: 2003-March-15
- Location:Hamburg, Germany
- Interests:games and sports, esp. bridge,chess and (beach-)volleyball
Posted 2010-August-17, 05:38
I have no problems with the unplayable system (NT 11-14) so far.
SO I would double too in the context of ELC.
SO I would double too in the context of ELC.
Kind Regards
Roland
Sanity Check: Failure (Fluffy)
More system is not the answer...
Roland
Sanity Check: Failure (Fluffy)
More system is not the answer...
Page 1 of 1